0 votes

Your views on the executive pay cap that Obama mentioned

What's your view on limiting executive pay at $500,000 a year?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


The cap, which applies to very few people, has loopholes built into the language and is really only intended to appease the angry masses. This constitutes the "sacrifice" that the banksters will be asked to make. Our (little people's) sacrifice, in addition to committing our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren to servitude in order to finance the bailouts, may be announced later this month.


from one of the 'bailed out' companies who is worth compensation of $500K/year or more, should quit and go seek other employment right now. Or is the gubment going to tell them that they can't quit, either?

There are many who qualify.

Since the bailouts are

Since the bailouts are unconstitutional,anything done afterwards pertaining to it is also unconstitutional.
Unless the president is appointing officers,he has no say in how much they should be paid.

The government throws the people bones while keeping the treasures of this country.

13 No servant can serve two masters; for either he shall hate the one, and love the other, or else he shall lean to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and riches. - Luke 16

This is for failed companies only

that sucked up taxpayers $$.

They would have gone bankrupt from their own efforts.

I have NO problem with limiting pay cap's for these corporate socialists.

I also agree w/ other posters that it's a must we go & try & get the $18 Billion these thieves payed themselves in early bonuses, right before they accepted $100+ Billion of taxpayer life-jackets

Pay cap

the pay cap is flat out unconstitutional. the federal government does not have the power, nor should it, to subvert the sovereignty of states when it comes to matters of private parties and their rights to enter contracts.

If the federal government wants to condition aid on the renegotiation of salary contracts between CEOs and their companies that would be fine. But the president cannot, by decree, declare existing salary contracts null and void and then rewrite them to terms of his liking.



The 'new' Nationalsozialistische Amerikanerin Arbeiterpartei!

Yay socialism! It's worked out so well before, lets let it happen again! I mean, we're not like those dumb Germans that got swindled by Hitler now, are we?

That about sums my feelings up on the matter.

good article below (no reply tab)

One seed can yield a thousand fruits which can yield a million seeds ~ cultivator

Check this article out....

This article pertains to what the so-called cap will really do....
Banks could still find wiggle room in pay caps

Perfectly fine with me....

If you were to investigate this limit more closely, you would realize that there are certain conditions that must apply first.

The condition is that the executives whose pays are limited must have oversight of companies that have received a handout in the form of a bailout for said company (true story, look it up). So... If your an executive, and don't want your pay limited, don't come crawling to the government with your hand out. And if you've already done so and don't want the government to dictate your salary, give it all back and tell them to stuff it. Its as simple as that. By not including this condition in your quest for opinions, you were either ignorant at best or disingenuous and inflammatory at worst. Judging by all the comments on here that think it's wrong for the feds to do this, shows that this condition should have been included because I think the responses would be much different.

Even though I vehemently disagree with ANY bailouts at all for ANYONE at all, for them to be effective and at least of some benefit to us taxpayers, then this limit will allow more of the bailout money to be used where it might actually help the people footing the bill (us). The more money tied up in executive salaries, the less available to re-finance all the sub-prime mortgages out there.

What the government dishes out, it controls. For proof, see supreme court decision forcing co-education on VMI (Virginia Military Academy). VMI accepts federal funds and therefore can be forced to accept females per SOCUTS decision. This is also why so many states roll over in the face of federal encroachment. If they don't agree with a federal mandate, whether it deals with roads or not, the feds threaten to cut off federal highway funds to force state compliance. Sad really, this carrot and stick approach. But it serves all of them right for being foolish enough to have any types of dealings at all with the feds, whether for highways, education, bailouts, or whatever.

If you don't want to get snake-bit, keep yur dang hands out of the den of vipers. Let that be a lesson to the execs, to both run their companies with a lot more prudence, and to not come crawling to the feds (read here taxpayers) when you hose it all up...


The paycap makes sense, not making the penalties retro-active

dosnt. These execs KNEW a paycap was coming- regardless of any bonuses so they skimmed all the money theyd ever need from us in bonuses BEFORE we could cap their salary. What I WOULD like to see is the original 18 billion in bonuses returned and a full-on audit of our money. I really dont care if "theyve already been given it and it would go against Bush's original deal". Bottom line is it is wrong for them to keep the bonuses when the very people whose money it was are now unemployed and struggling. As for a paycap , there should be a formula generated for that. A base salary + increase based on performance- and the way I see it NONE of them have performed well enough to expect an increase- much less a bonus. Banking in these times should cease to be a racket for the filthy rich, but rather a good ól day job for people who are good at honest math.

By reasonable comparison

Then the President can declare what everyone makes. Nice precident!!

I don't exactly like the Banksters and what they are doing, but I would never support a restriction. It is the fault of the people.

"We are the inheritors of the American Enlightenment, which tells us that Individual Liberty always trumps collectivism in all forms."

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

I agree!

I agree! He shouldn't interfere with private business, just as he shouldn't give private business our money.

I wish my pay was set at $500,000

I could get by I think.

You gotta pay to play.

Just thinking about makes me

Just thinking about makes me shake. I first heard this and thought "OK, go get the CEOs!" but then I thought it out a bit and thought "Well, isn't this like the minimum wage, where the government can tell you how much to pay?" These things seem good at the beginning but then it's like this: if the government starts telling one sector what to do, you know that one day they'll consider telling you what to do. You give the gov't an inch, they'll take everything.

evening COMRADES... thats my

evening COMRADES... thats my comment!

"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson

I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain

I think that goes for me, too

Good night, all! I'll be back the next time I catch a horrible communicable disease and am bedridden for the day.

And Sierra? You're kinda weird, but ultimately you're all right, tovarich!




is going to "over reach" at every socialistic opportunity. Mark my words.

It's unconstitutional

but when has that stopped them??

probably lying

but if he is not, it will breed corruption and serve to restrict innovation and motivation.

"The state is the great myth where everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Frederic Bastiat

It really bugs me

It smells of revenge. "let's get the big bad CEO's".
And the idea is SO easy to swallow. I'll admit that I even had a little "yeah let's get 'em", going on in my head.

But in reality, I fear that it is nothing more than the first tentacle into the nationalization of all American companies. So, after thinking about it, I'm against it.

"I don't endorse anything they say"
~Ron Paul On the 911 Truth movement.

I think its just to put on a

I think its just to put on a show for the TV watchers and give them the impression hes out for the 'average American.' While it gives the impression hes doing well for us, he has no authority to do this and it put the Federal gov't in the place of calling the shots.

How about

1. No more bailouts. So we keep our money, our buying power and don't burden the future generations.

2. End the 'lender of last resort' and quit socializing the loses that prop up fraud on the banks parts and lead to inflation.

3. End fractional reserve banking and hold banks accountable to the same standards as other businesses and start treating fraud as fraud. Let banks charge service charges for holding assets and let them stand on their own feet like the rest of the marketplace. People will flock to good banks, bad ones will close. Fraud will be punished as it is (ahemm... as it SHOULD be) elsewhere. Let banks set their own wages and determine if someones worth 20 million. Though I suspect without shady practices to enable exorbitant sums, this will be considered unreasonable.

this is called bluffing

he is trying to make us trust him and you know what happens next. When a stranger pulls a kid into a car, doesn't he or she hand him a piece of candy- same thing going on here.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!


meh, that's it, meh

Be the change you want to see

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Start getting freedom today by dumping Federal Reserve Notes, Stocks, Banks and anything made outside the USA. Buy precious metals, real estate, businesses, food and guns and get your business community to use local or sound currenc

This cap applies because bailout money is involved.

Isn't this bailout really just another form of "public assistance"?

There are strings attached in the way of asset and income limits for any other welfare recipient, so why not for these corporations?

Where in the Constitution

Where in the Constitution does it allow for the President of the United States of America to take money from everyone and give it to his buddies, much less tell anyone what they can or cannot make.

I don't think the government ought to be dictating who can make what because the government shouldn't be bailing anyone out to begin with.

I know I'll hear but yeah, these companies ARE getting bailouts so they SHOULD be held accountable, have their pay cut etc.

To that I say WRONG!!! All this does is encourage the government to grope ever further into controlling the markets. You give them an inch and they will take multiple miles. We should be staunch in our opposition and not acquiesce to their *logic*.

The bailouts are immoral and illegal and should cease immediately. PERIOD. Sorry to be so crude but no amount of lube they put on the big red, white and blue dildo they are currently ramming in me and my kids @sses is going to make me any more content with wtf they are doing.

I like Denninger's idea


And Obama is only limiting executive pay for those who will take bailout money in the future, not all executives, and unfortunately, not the executives for the companies who have already taken money from the TARP.

"the only thing that keeps the banking system from failing is general ignorance about how the banking system works."


would have LOVED it! heck, I bet Hitler would have loved it too, and taken it one step further.....
or did that already happen?

" the important thing is to never stop questioning, curiousity, has it's own reason for existing..
Albert Einstien